For the last 30 years the temperature of the atmosphere has been measured by Microwave Sounding Units (MSUs) on orbiting satellites. This record purports to show warming since 1979, but as we shall find out much of this warming is suspicious due to adjustments made on the raw data and possible measurement biases.
The Satellite Temperature Record
Source: UAH monthly temperature record (dec 1978-may 2008). Graph truncated at May 2008 for analytical reasons which are beyond the scope of this post.As well grounded climate skeptic bloggers we immediately become suspicious of this record because it shows a warming trend. We know that the surface record shows only Urban Heat Island bias and AC Unit Warming bias in this period. Yet neither of these effects will be picked up by satellites, so why do the satellites still show warming? Something is wrong.
The #1 tool of the avid skeptic is imagination. So lets put our imagination to use and gather together some seeds of doubt. With luck some of these seeds will survive to grow into full blown talking points.
Data is adjusted before release
Adjusting data is not scientific. In engineering if an instrument has failings then you shouldn't just patch over that using a series of so-called "adjustments", you should address the root problems and make a better instrument. Could it be that the warming in the satellite records is just an artifact of adjustments? Could be! Great we have discovered an in-road to a major source of doubt.
Questions that are unanswered: What are these so-called adjustments? How are they made? Why are they made? Why haven't I seen these adjustments? Why doesn't the IPCC mention them? Why haven't I read about them in the media? Is it possible that the satellite data has just become a complicated mess that makes no real sense?
How do ground radio and microwave transmissions affect the readings?
Could the increase in ground radio and microwave transmissions in the post-war boom make the atmosphere look like it's warmer even if it is not? Nothing is mentioned of this on any of the satellite sites suggesting that a potentially significant cause of the recent warming is being ignored, dismissed out of hand or the "experts" simply haven't thought of it.
As a side note, it's an interesting thought that if the satellite scientists were to admit that satellites cannot measure temperature accurately they would lose their funding. Note I am not making any accusations here. Feel free to speculate on this in the comments though.
How do nearby satellites and orbitting debris affect the satellite measurements?
Satellites reflect solar energy and emit radio transmissions. Also there will be other effects that science does not yet understand because science understands little. All of this could have the effect of biasing sensitive satellite instruments such as the MSUs. It stands to reason that the number of satellites have increased since the 1970s and so this potential warming effect has increased. Again there is no mention of this on any of the satellite temperature sites or in the mainstream media.
Empirical evidence of Satellite warming bias - Satellites measured too much warming during the 1998 El Nino
Source: UAH satellite temperature vs GISS surface temperature, adjusted to the same baseline.There is real warming (briefly) during a pacific El Nino event. But the satellite records show about 0.4C more warming than the surface records. This suggests they are exagerating any temperature rise, including the long term trend.
Now once we have discovered a problem like this, the correct course of action is to adjust the satellite temperature record to correctly take this into account. If we do this (dropping the trend down by 0.4C) then virtually all of the warming of the past 30 years in the satellite records is wiped out. We are obviously getting closer to the truth here.
Conclusion
Here I have cast a lot of doubt on the satellite record simply by using my imagination. It is quite plausible that the actual temperature of the atmosphere has not increased since 1979. In fact taking all possible factors into account the real temperature of the atmosphere may have fallen drastically since 1979.
This is by no means a completed task. I will come back to this topic in later posts (this is just Part 1) and show how we can cast more doubt. In particular I believe photos of satellites, both on the ground before launch and in orbit, can be pored over and fuel further speculation.
A temperature measuring satellite in orbit. There are many unaddressed questions concerning the ability and placement of such satellites to accurately measure temperature.
As a side note, it's an interesting thought that if the satellite scientists were to admit that satellites cannot measure temperature accurately they would lose their funding. Note I am not making any accusations here. Feel free to speculate on this in the comments though.You are right. I love this site. You should write a post about how the alarmist "scientists" deceive the media to get $1000000000's of hard-earned taxpayer money while the good folk at free market think tanks volunteer their time to try to get the politicians to stop this madness. I think we need more teabagging to drive some sense into this country.
ReplyDeleteHey...this is a wonderful website buddy and an informative post!!! i am new here and i found this site very interesting and informative ,, you are a professional blogger i think i have a great interest in such things...thank you for the post buddy and keep on posting nice stuff like this :)
DeleteYour post had provided me with another point of view on this topic. Thank you for sharing your perspective.
DeleteCoeruleus,
ReplyDeleteGood thought about the scientists - and I'm glad you didn't take the lazy shortcut of writing "$10^9". Thanks to Inferno for pointing this out in a previous post!
I think you're right. One thing that is certain to influence the measurements is that space is cold. Very, very, cold.
ReplyDeleteThat is going to make the temperature of the earth seem a lot warmer.
Another nail in the coffin of manmade global warming!
ReplyDeleteAccording to global warming AGW theory, so-called greenhouse gasses trap the heat, preventing it from leaving earth. Therefore, the satellites should measure less heat, not more. The satellite temperature graphs should point down, but they are in fact pointing up. Global warming is disproved by the very data that was thought to prove it!
ReplyDeleteIt is worth mentioning, that the temperature data of the Hadley Centre by itself disprove global warming. In February 1878 the global temperature anomaly (SST + land stations) was 0.364 degrees Celsius. 131 years later in February 2009 it was 0.356 degrees. That is no warming, it is a cooling of 0.008 degress! The difference between the coldest and the warmest months (January 1893 and February 1998) was 1.719 degrees. The earth is not warming, the temperature just fluctuates, and the more, the longer the record is. The longer the record, the higher the standard deviation. You can show this, when you calculate the standard deviation for a cumulating number of years starting at the beginning of the data set. For 1850 - 1900 the standard deviation is about 0.12. For 1850 - 2008 it is about 0.25 - it doubled within about 100 years. So 2100 it should double again. This means, the highest difference between months will not be 1.7 but 3.4 degrees. From this you can approximate, that in 2100 the global temperature perhaps may show by coincidence an anomaly of 3 degrees, but it is just natural fluctuation.
ReplyDeleteFor the satellites there is a clear explanation for the warming: it is orbital decay. Satellites measure the radiation of a certain layer of the atmosphere and deduce the temperature from this via Stefan-Boltzmann law (roughly). Because of friction with molecules of the earth atmosphere the satellites slow down and descent to lower altitudes. Therefore, they measure the radiation of lower atmospheric layers. However, at a lower altitude air is warmer. So we don't see a warming atmosphere, we just see the orbital decay of the satellites. At El Nino events the pressure of the air increases due to higher evaporation from the warming pacific. Then the orbital decay becomes stronger. That is the reason, the satellites show a stronger warming signal at the especially strong El Nino 1998.
As the saying goes - a little knowledge is a useful thing. Go on with the good work.
Great post, you should publish this! Don't expect to get published in the politically correct journals though.
ReplyDeleteIf only the congress had access to this kind of knowledge. Right now they're being fed with the AGW hoax from the "scientists". Sad times.
Perhaps you could set up the "Satellite Station Project" and explore all the siting and other issues that lead to these sorts of deep distortions.
ReplyDeleteOf course this would be easier with NASA co-operation but they appear to be part of the AGW hoax. On the other hand, there are many fewer satellite stations than surface stations to be examined.
AGW will eventually go the way of the pet rock and the Macarena. And just like those fads, not fast enough to suit me.
ReplyDeleteI guess none of these AGW freakout sandal-wearing types has ever noticed that the ol' blue marble was like a bazillion degrees (and that's just in Centigrade) about 10 billion years ago and is nowhere near that hot now, except maybe in like Death Valley and down toward the bottom of volcanoes and whatnot. What a bunch of whack jobs.
ReplyDeletep.s. I didn't mean to imply that I personally had noticed how hot it was 10 billion years ago, or at the bottom of volcanoes for that matter, because I wasn't at either, but this is reliably reported in the Reader's Digest Planet Earth series (condensed version) and also one of the Star Trek episodes talked about it I think.
ReplyDeletep.p.s I also didn't mean to imply anything negative about either Death Valley or scum-sucking, leftist hippie sandal wearing types. Nor Al Gore. Nor the Centigrade scale, which is perfectly workable if you're in like Europe or something.
ReplyDeleteExcellent post. Notice how the satellite temp reading appears to lag the surface reading. As we know, MSU satellites are geosynchronous, and are hit by photons from the sun BEFORE the photons hit Earth. So clearly the satellite readings are false, as any change in temperature must happen at the satellite prior to a similar change on Earth. Popperian science demands that only one falsification is enough to destroy the whole theory. Therefore, AGW is false.
ReplyDeleteYeah, you should ask James Hansen to publish the locations of those satellites for the last 30 years. And if they refuse (which they will) they've got something to hide.
ReplyDeleteYou should also note that in the 1970s everyone was talking about global cooling, and then they put satellites up to 'measure' temperature, and the earth started 'warming'. Coincidence? I think not, as you have proved.
I may be wrong but can't I see air con fans on that satellite?
ReplyDeleteI'm working on an analysis of satellite data which demonstrates that it has been driven by movements on the Rio de Janeiro stock market. I'd be happy to do a guest post on this.
ReplyDeleteGeorge: "Yeah, you should ask James Hansen to publish the locations of those satellites for the last 30 years. And if they refuse (which they will) they've got something to hide."
ReplyDeleteWell I will just throw a freedom of information requests at them.
Why should they be allowed to dodge my Blog posts? Given my blog is accessibly to anyone with an internet connection (something I am sure they have at NASA!) there is frankly no excuse to ignore my challenges is there? If they can't put aside at least an hour a day to deal with my concerns that just isn't on. You are right they would be hiding something.
I counted the pixels that make up the stars on that photo. They make up 0.01% of the entire backdrop.
ReplyDeleteNow what is the surface temperature of a star?
About 6,000 degrees celcius. So I estimate that the starry backdrop is causing a 0.6 degree increase in the temperature of these sensors.
This equals the entire warming of the 20th century, so clearly the warming measurements are simply a result of satellite sensors being sited too close to the stars.
Arm Chair said: "clearly the warming measurements are simply a result of satellite sensors being sited too close to the stars"
ReplyDeleteNow we're getting somewhere! Any volunteers to do siting audits of satellites?
Thanks to Inferno for starting this welcome addition to the blogosciencisphere, keep on posting entries of this quality and you must be a frontrunner for Science Blog of the Year. I have access to a bank of about 50 PCs where I work and as each machine can 'vote' once every day for about a fortnight I reckon I could push about 700 votes your way. That should get the point across to the alarmists and there so-called 'sience'! Let's Go!
ReplyDeleteI am willing to write guest posts on what for me are the 2 key pieces of evidence that surely expose the hoaxical nature of the AGW fraud. The first is the tiny size of the 'correction' that climate siencetists subtract from there measurements to cater for the fact that most of there stations are in the middle of big cities. It is less than 0.1 Farnheit! That's nuts, I have driven across my city (at night so as to avoid data corruption from the tailpipes of other veercles) with a high resolution thermometer and datalogger strapped to my car and the temperature went up by 5 Centigrade (It was about the same in Celsius). That's 41 degrees Fahrenhite! I think we can all see what a realistic correction would do to Global Warming. We should organise some volunteers to drive across there towns with thermometers and publish the actual size of the Urban Heat Isthmus effect,
The second key piece of evidence is obvious: Al Gore lives in a big house. Need I say more?
Phil, please don't besmirch the integrity of this site with your offers to game the system of science blog voting. That's how you warmers deal with all your data, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteAnd anyone can spot the flaw in your data collection technique: you're failing to register the cooling effect of air flowing over your thermometer as you drive. The uhi warming effect is therefore even greater than your suppressed figures would show, I would imagine by a significant amount. I may be a retired industrial chemical engineer, but I can tell that you climate guys don't know what you're doing.
@Anon 4/23 11:39 - There is an AC on that satellite, I see it too! It’s right between the Stevenson screen and the barbeque, next to the parking lot!
ReplyDeletearch stanton
Despite their own numbers proving them wrong, the Alarmists continue to practice their “religion”.
ReplyDeleteYou can lead a horse to knowledge, but you can’t make him think.
Wait, if the satellites overstated the El Nino warming in 1998, just think how much they could have overstated the warmth of all the years since then, which they claim haven't been quite as warm! I think the scientists from the 70s who all agreed we were headed for global cooling and a new ice age were on to something.
ReplyDeleteNow, I'm not an expert, but I've always wondered if they accounted for the changing heat on satellites as they drift out of sun-side to night-side. The expansion and contraction of instruments surely has an effect on the readings. If the orbit of satellites is such that (overall) they spend more time day-side, then this could possibly introduce a warming bias. If succesive MSU orbits have brought them more into the light, so to speak, then this might account for a warming bias. I've seen nothing in the "literature" on it. It's amazing how narrow the focus can be for pro-AGW scientists and commentators. They seem to have a serious deficiency in imagination and creative thinking.
ReplyDeleteHa. The satellites are so close together they're reading each other's temperatures and taking each other's pictures!
ReplyDelete" ... you can see another satellite that was passing underneath GeoEye’s satellite as the photo was being taken."
http://nielsenhayden.com/ml-art/2009_inaug_satpic.jpg
Until modern days it is so famous and so popular that waiting list for hermes is about six years. That is probably the longest waiting list in the world for the fashionable bags. And hermes belt collection these days include a huge number of options. Among hermes wallet you can find different sorts of bags from pretty simple to very luxurious leather bags.
ReplyDeleteHerbal diet supplements and lida and prescribed or doctor recommended weight loss product. If you expect to lose lots of pounds with this kind of lida daidaihua then you should think again. What these daidaihua can help you with however, lida slimming is giving you some extra psychological motivation as well as slimming capsule curbing the edge off your food cravings and your appetite. Don’t expect miracles – stay realistic. The first thing you should do if you consider to buy these kinds of slimming capsules is to read the label very carefully.
The French "high sewing" or "high dressmaking" style brings much good fame to Chanel bags .They are designed in its full range of women's Chanel Wallet and represent the outstanding quality. Women all over the world desire to own at least one Chanel handbags during their lifetime and often go to great lengths to achieve that.
When it comes to discussions about Tiffany jewellery , no conversations on the matter will be complete without a mention of Tiffany rings . Thanks to how the silver rings has been portrayed in popular culture, starting from a movie about a store it operates – Breakfast at Tiffany earrings – it has become a term that is synonymous with jewelries.
It's an important discussion, specially if we're talking about The Satellite Temperature Record. We've been searching about this same matter, but it wasn't easy because this information does not realistic in the popular culture yet, so we can't ignore this blog, and we are hoping your next edition.
ReplyDeleteHi, great Blog. The way you explained it is really awesome and makes every one to read till the end. Keep posting..
ReplyDeleteFairly good post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wished to say that I've really loved reading your blog posts.Any means Ailing be subscribing to your feed and I hope you submit once more soon.
ReplyDeleteYour post is really good Home remedies for diarrhea Cure ringworm naturally Home remedies for mouth ulcers Prevent dizziness White spots on skin Stomach gas Hard stool treatment Health benefits of almonds Cure ear infection Under eye wrinkles Natural laxative foods Baby ear infection Common digestive system diseases and disorders Get pregnant easily Home remedies for pneumonia Health benefits of papaya Home remedies for common fever Home remedies for cough Home remedies for boils Home remedies for burns Ear wax removal Home remedies for anorexia Home remedies for bursitis Smooth and glowing skin Heartburn relief
ReplyDeleteExcellent post. Notice how the satellite temp reading appears to lag the surface reading. As we know, MSU satellites are geosynchronous, and are hit by photons from the sun BEFORE the photons hit Earth. So clearly the satellite readings are false, as any change in temperature must happen at the satellite prior to a similar change on Earth. Popperian science demands that only one falsification is enough to destroy the whole theory. Therefore, AGW is false.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Cheap GW2 Gold climate change AGW theory, so-called garden greenhouse gasses trap heat, stopping the item via cheap D3 items causing earth. As a result, the actual spoutnik really should evaluate a lesser amount of temperature, not more. The particular satellite tv on pc heat equity graphs ought to point straight downcheap D3 Gold , but they are actually aiming upward. Wipeout of the Diablo 3 Gold earths is proven to be wrong from the really info which was thought to establish it!
ReplyDeleteyou shared a nice article and you also have a unique blog. lisa
ReplyDeleteAnother blatant example of government funded pseudo-science. Don't you warmistas ever study physics. Ever hear of a little thing called gravity? I guess not.
ReplyDeleteAny so-called weather satellite is subject to the massive gravitational pull of the earth which draws it closer and closer to the ground every second. This throws off all the measurements because all the microwaves are closer. Also the satellite gets warmer since it is closer to the radiation reflected from the earth's cloud cover.
Then it fires its little engines to get back up to the intial orbit and all the unused rocket fuel and vapors surround the sensors and warm it even more.
Finally moving up in altitude gets the satellite closer to the sun where it is even warmer thanks to solar insolation.
It's just basic physics which is why your graphs are so bad.
I must say that you are pretty good at blogging and you must need to carry on with this all the time. Keep it up.
DeleteThis is a good post. This post gives truly quality information. I’m definitely going to look into it. Really very useful tips are provided here.
ReplyDeleteI have found that this site is very informative, interesting and very well written. Just keep on posting.
ReplyDeletethis is a very good site that provides lots of information about the topics covered in depth.
ReplyDelete24 hours service can help you solve any problems when purchasing D3 Gold.As long as you place order from there, big benefits for you each time.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate your post. It is very helpful for all the people on the web.
ReplyDeleteBlog gave us useful information to work. You have done an amazing job!
ReplyDeletethis is a very good site that provides lots of information about the topics covered in depth.
ReplyDeleteA lot more webmasters thank you for your publish. It is extremely helpful for everyone on line raguel
ReplyDeleteI have found that this site is very informative, interesting and very well written. keep up the nice high quality writing
ReplyDeletehave found that this site is very informative, interesting and very well written. keep up the nice high quality writing
ReplyDeletefound that this site is very informative, interesting and very well written. keep up the nice high quality writing
ReplyDeletefound that this site is very informative, interesting and very well written. keep up the nice high quality writing
ReplyDeletesite is very informative, interesting and very well written. keep up the nice high quality writing
ReplyDeleteis very informative, interesting and very well written. keep up the nice high quality writing
ReplyDeleteDie erste ist d3 gold die Dampscale Basilisk Eye. Diese Dinge sind für Reputation verwendet Turn-in und kann so viel wie 3 WoW Gold pro Stück im Auktionshaus wert. Der beste Ort, um sie versammeln sich im nördlichen Teil der Wälder von Terokkar. Jede der Basilisken in diesem Bereich eine Chance haben, sie fallen zu lassen.Cloth Punkt ist die erste Sache, diablo 3 gold buy die im Preis geändert hat. Wolle und magewaeve Tuch geworden das teuerste Tuch im Auktionshaus. Dies ist definitiv eines der besten WoW Gold machen Geheimnisse, weil diese Begriffe immer sehr gefragt sind. Die Menschen sind ständig sie zu kaufen, aber es gibt nicht genug Leute Landwirtschaft ihnen. Wenn Sie diese Farm und legte sie auf das Auktionshaus, diablo 3 schnell gold machen können Sie eine Menge von WoW Gold zu machen.
ReplyDeletew3n465 it is such a new boots, because of a lot of Europe and theUnited States star street snap have foot
ReplyDeleteHe can get perplexed Air Yeezy 2 about which suggestions to go along with and which to go away aside. But with your satellite Tv trend tips and hints you are able to get the comprehensive Air Yeezy 2 thought abut the most up-to-date trends and fashions.
ReplyDeletecamping merit badge pamphlet answers hiking shoes for women narrow feet here backpacking europe alone safe camping checklist excel
ReplyDeleteThe process should follow the questions below. Best rated metal detectors are classified according to their performances. metal detectors for sale Can metal detectors detect non-metallic contaminants?Metal detectors cannot detect non-metallic contaminants. Metal detectors are electronic equipments used to locate metal objects that are hidden in baggage, ground or on the person?s body.
ReplyDeletecording to their performances. metal detectors for sale Can metal detectors detect non-metallic contaminants?Metal detectors cannot detect non-metallic contam
ReplyDelete